Facts, Evidence, and Presuppositions…

Danny puts some great thoughts and quotes up from Bahnsen, he writes:

Facts and evidence are always interpreted within a philosophical framework, that is, a worldview. As Cornelius Van Til once said,

Facts and interpretation of facts cannot be separated. It is impossible even to discuss any particular fact except in relation to some principle of interpretation. The real question about facts is, therefore, what kind of universal [general truth] can give the best account of the facts. Or rather, the real question is which universal can state or give meaning to any fact (Cornelius Van Til, Christian-Theistic Evidences, In Defense of Biblical Christianity, vol. 6, i-ii).

Therefore, if one is to make an argument against Christianity (e.g. – the “problem” of evil), one must provide a worldview and framework that is coherent and supports one’s evidence against Christianity. In the case of the “problem” of evil, one must first show that such a thing as “evil” exists (where evil violates an absolute, transcendental standard of good) given one’s presuppositions before the argument can be made.

I would argue that facts and evidences are not intelligible without first presupposing the Christian worldview. Therefore,

If there is no evidence that is intelligible apart from the Christian worldview, then there is no evidence that counts against the truth of Christianity (Greg Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic, 84).